This business of the Left insisting that everyone believe their endless lies and BS is a kind of mind-rape. Against Our Will.

That Orwell feared it more than bombs is telling.

The boys were laughing and kicking the idea around, but it struck me they were missing the point. The idea is to break your mind and your will, like the Director did to Winston in “1984.”

Then I found this, and wanted to pass it on:

“The phrase “two plus two makes five” (or “2 + 2 = 5”) is sometimes used as a succinct and vivid representation of an illogical statement, especially one made and maintained to suit an ideological agenda. Its common use originates from its inclusion in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, where it is contrasted with the true, mathematical phrase “two plus two make four”.

Orwell’s protagonist, Winston Smith, uses it to consider the possibility that the State might declare “two plus two makes five” as a fact; he ponders that if everybody believes in it, does that make it true?

“The novel 1984 wasn’t the first time Orwell mentioned the concept. During his employment at the BBC he became familiar with the methods of Nazi propaganda. In his essay “Looking Back on the Spanish War,” published 4 years before 1984 was written:

‘Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as “the truth” exists. […]

If the Leader says of such and such an event, “It never happened”–well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five–well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs […]’

It is probable that Orwell derived this notion from Nazi Reichsmarschall Hermann Gé¶ring, who once, in a debatably hyperbolic display of loyalty to Adolf Hitler, declared, “If the Fuhrer wants it, two and two make five!”

In Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel Notes from Underground, the protagonist implicitly supports the idea of two plus two making five, spending several paragraphs considering the implications of rejecting the statement “two plus two makes four.”

His purpose is not ideological, however. Instead, he proposes that it is the free will to choose or reject the illogical as well as the logical that makes mankind human. He adds: “I admit that two times two makes four is an excellent thing, but if we are to give everything its due, two times two makes five is sometimes a very charming thing too.”

http://www.netcharles.com/orwell/articles/col-twoplustwo.htm

(P.S. Can you believe the admin official who implied that his platoon-mates were psychopaths? Simply astounding. How could the administration possibly be that invested in Bowe Bergdahl, of all people, to ‘dis’ so many upstanding soldiers that way. Is politics really all there is to these people? Yes, yes, I jest. LOL)

Analogy:

“one” = John F. Kerry
“the others” = the Swiftboaters

We all know whom the mainstreamers believed, but they even managed to turn “Swiftboat” into a verb [a la “Bork”], meaning “to lie about”.

Sigh.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jun/05/rachel-maddow/maddow-pentagon-made-story-jessica-lynchs-heroism/

Yes, they were both absent from the place they were supposed to be. And yes, soldiers were sent to rescue them.

But the difference involves a concept that repeatedly eludes the Left: intent. It’s the difference between an accident and a crime. We have separate judicial systems to handle matters differentiated by intent.

To the Left, though, intent means nothing. For example, if person A is offended by person B, then person B is culpable regardless of person B’s intent.

By extension, Bergdahl’s intentional departure from his post is little different from Lynch’s having made a wrong turn.